The below CFJ is 3999. I assign it to ais523.
status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3999
=============================== CFJ 3999 ===============================
Rule 2139 does not define the contents of the Registrar's monthly
report to contain all dates such that a person has registered or
deregistered.
==========================================================================
Caller: Juan
Judge: ais523
==========================================================================
History:
Called by Juan: 13 Oct 2022 20:31:16
Assigned to ais523: [now]
==========================================================================
Caller's Arguments:
Arguments for TRUE:
Rule 2139 mandates the Registrar's monthly report to include “For each
former player for which the information is reasonably available, the
dates on which e registered and deregistered.” Now, a player is defined
as simply “a registered person”, which would indicate a “former player”
to refer to a person which at some point was registered. Other readings
include that it refers to the entity that was a player and ceased to
exist when that player was deregistered – this is not supported by
evidence. Indeed, the next paragraph of Rule 869 states that “[i]f e
does so [deregister], e CANNOT register or be registered for 30 days”,
which indicates the entity which is the player continues to exist after
deregistration. That is: playerhood is a state, and “former player”
should be understood as an entity which at some point in the past was
registered, but is no longer.
Now, back to the rule in question. It refers to “the dates on which e [a
former player] registered and deregistered”. The qualification “on which
e registered and deregistered” obviously refer to a pair of dates, and
not one date in which the player did both actions. That is not in
question and shall not be discussed further. But the point is that the
plural “dates” now refers to that pair of dates, and the definitive
article “the” makes the whole subject phrase have reference ONLY IF
there is a single entity that satisfies the condition.
Therefore, for people that became players more than once, the phrase has
no referent, and so is confusing and/or ambiguous. So is the whole as
well.
Note, if the rule said “the dates on which e registered OR
deregistered”, there would be a reasonable interpretation, more in tune
with the game's traditions, that the plural refers to all such dates in
which that particular player has either registered, deregistered, or
both. It is not so, however.
There remains only a single question: is there a more suitable
interpretation that makes it so the text is in accordance with (what I
suppose is) the intent of the rule? I'd say NOT, for if the plural in
“dates” accomodates a multitude of possible entities satisfying the
condition that follows, that condition would be “on which e registered
and deregistered” – which is much more rare than what has historically
appeared in Registrars' Monthly Reports.
Arguments for FALSE:
This is proposterous, nitpicking, and must not be indulged.
Caller's Evidence:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rule 2139/17 (Power=2)
> The Registrar
>
> The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping
> track of players.
>
> The Registrar's weekly report includes:
>
> 1. A list of all players, including information sufficient to
> identify and contact each player.
>
> 2. The date on which each player most recently became a player.
>
> 3. For each forum with non-Foreign publicity, sufficient
> instructions for players to receive messages there.
>
> The Registrar's monthly report includes:
>
> 1. For each former player for which the information is reasonably
> available, the dates on which e registered and deregistered.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
==========================================================================
